Access key 0 - Accessibility, Access key 2 - Jump to content, Access key 7 - Jump to navigation
Skip To Content | Skip To Navigation
 

Home > About Ofcom > Corporate Structure and Governance > Content Board > Notes of Content Board  > 28


21|06|05

Minutes Of The Twenty-Eight Meeting Of The Ofcom Content Board Held At Riverside House On 20 & 21 June 2005

Present

Richard Hooper Chairman

Sara Nathan Deputy Chairman

Sue Balsom Member

Floella Benjamin Member

Kevin Carey Member

Jonathan Edwards Member

Pam Giddy Member

Rosemary Kelly Member

Adam Singer Member (minutes 1 – 17)

Kath Worrall Member

Kip Meek Senior Partner, Competition and Content (Ofcom)

Tim Suter Partner, Content and Standards (Ofcom)

In Attendance

[Withheld from published minutes]

Apologies:

Matthew MacIver Member

Access service obligations on television broadcasters in 2006

1. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 89(05) which advised the Content Board of the outcome of the mid-year review and developments in relation to music subtitling and the use of standard abbreviations for access services by EPGs and printed publications. It was NOTED that Ofcom had published its Code on Television Access Services in July 2004 which set out targets for broadcasters for subtitling, signing and audio description of programmes. At that time 70 channels were required to provide access services, most with effect from the start of 2005. Members NOTED that Granada Plus had subsequently closed, and therefore the current number was 69.

2. The Content Board NOTED, in relation to the outcome of the mid year review, that in total, 79 channels would be required to provide access services in 2006. Additional channels included Paramount Comedy 2, MTV Dance, Animal Planet, Discovery Health & Home, Discovery Science, Discovery Civilisation, UKTV Bright Ideas, UKTV Drama, Nickelodeon and Nick Toons. Channels dropped from the list included National Geographic, and most music channels owned by Emap (The Hits, Magic TV, Smash Hits, Kiss TV and Kerrang). Members NOTED that Ofcom proposed to brief stakeholders (in particular affected licensees and disability organisations) ahead of the publication of a statement in July 2005. It was NOTED that Ofcom was insisting that all of the channels provided Ofcom with their revenue figures as part of the review.

3. Members were ADVISED that a combination of factors could result in a reduction of channels required to carry access services in future years, including continuing fragmentation in audience sizes and subsequent reduction in revenues. It was NOTED that it would be helpful to have information on a cost-benefit analysis of signing. It was NOTED that the access services review would look at whether the current formula remained appropriate, particularly in the light of the hike in obligations that would occur from the beginning of 2007. It was NOTED that Ofcom would be undertaking a snapshot review of the usage of access services as part of the Code review. In addition Members were interested to NOTE that the Music Publishers' Association (MPA) had proposed a scheme whereby music channels would be permitted to show subtitles for music programmes. It was NOTED that broadcasters decided which programmes to provide services to, based on consumer requirements. It was NOTED that programmes such as Bid-up TV were excluded from the requirements as they were classed as advertising.

4. The Content Board NOTED that all significant EPG providers were taking steps to adopt the standard abbreviations mandated by Ofcom to denote access services. In addition, the Press Association and Broadcasting Data Services had ensured that a number of online listings providers had adopted the same abbreviations, which would appear in the Radio Times, TV Times, What’s On TV, TV and Satellite Week and TV Easy, as well as listing magazines produced by Bauer that had space for denoting programmes with subtitling. Many regional titles had accepted the Press Association’s offer to provide them with listings using the standard abbreviations, but national newspapers had been slow to respond. [Withheld from published minutes].

5. The Content Board NOTED the outcome of the mid-year review and AGREED that a statement of the channels required to provide access services in 2006 would be published on Ofcom’s website after key stakeholders had been briefed.

PSB Assessment: Specialist research and ‘stakeholder symposia’

6. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 78(05) which contained revised proposals for specialist research and stakeholder events following input provided at the April Content Board meeting in relation to the proposed PSB assessment framework. It was NOTED that the Content Board , as part of the assessment of effectiveness of PSB delivery, would be key users of outputs from the PSB Assessment framework, and in particular the ‘Stakeholder Symposium’ component, as its output would reflect the external consensus on the performance of the PSB s taken together.

7. The Content Board NOTED that the executive proposed to undertake bespoke research which would culminate in two ‘Stakeholder Symposia’ per year, to incorporate the opinions and evaluation of PSB output from broadcasters, producers and expert commentators. It was NOTED that the key purpose of the symposia was to engage both practitioners and other informed commentators in in-depth investigations assessing how well PSB purposes were being achieved by the broadcasters. It was felt that the key application of the symposia would be to aim for a consensus of both practitioner and observer opinion on the performance of the PSB s, going into the assessment process. It was NOTED that a small steering group consisting of specialists in the subject area and Ofcom colleagues would be drawn together at an early stage for each event, to input to the design of the research and to participate fully in the symposium.

8. The Content Board considered the topics identified by the executive and the proposed methodology of the symposia. It was felt that the symposia would be a good vehicle to help train broadcasters to be self critical in their end of year review. It was AGREED that the language used in the proposal would be reviewed to ensure adequate consumer focus and that the composition of the symposia group should be such that groups who did not usually have a voice were involved. It was CONFIRMED that citizen groups would be contacted and their input built into the planning of the symposia. It was SUGGESTED that the executive should ensure that young people were involved in the symposia and consideration be given to involving children’s charities. It was NOTED that the research briefing would take into account as much other research as available, such as opinion surveys.

9. Concern was expressed in relation to the level of openness which would be achieved by bringing together practitioners and broadcasters in this way and the effect that it could have on the output of the symposia. However, Members AGREED that generally the proposed format of the symposia was a good place to start and that it should be reviewed after a year for effectiveness. It was AGREED that the executive would re-consider the decision to hold the symposia in a neutral venue, [Withheld from published minutes]. Following consideration of the information and discussion, Members AGREED the proposed purposes and methodology for delivery, subject to the points raised in the discussion.

Channel 4 Briefing - Content Survey

10. [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 80(05) which analysed the peak output of Channel 4 since 1985. It was NOTED that the remit of Channel 4 as specified in the Communications Act 2003 was for the provision of "a broad range of high quality and diverse programming" that demonstrated "innovation, experimentation and creativity, appealed to the tastes and interests of a culturally diverse society, included programmes of an educational nature/value and exhibited a distinctive character".

11. It was NOTED that the trend in the number of hours of current affairs output had declined during 1999 and 2000, but had subsequently risen again. In relation to arts and classical music, Members were interested to NOTE that despite a fall in the number of hours in peak over the period, there had beenrecent attempts to bring arts programming to larger audiences. The number of f ilms broadcast had declined over the period. The greatest increase in peak time output had been in general factual, which covered a wide range of sub-genres from reality to science and history to documentaries and series. Members NOTED that partly as a result of a new Channel 4 strategy to commission contemporary drama and returning series the amount of drama transmitted in peak had increased in 2004, following a few years of fluctuation. It was NOTED that bigger budgets had led to more commissioning and less acquisitions. The Content Board then analysed a sample peak time schedule from 1995 with one from 2005.

12. The Content Board NOTED the results of the Channel 4 content survey. [Withheld from published minutes].

13. Members were then ADVISED of Channel 4’s 2005 programme policy, which identified;

14. Members considered the information in the briefing pack and presentation and discussed a number of themes which had emerged. One Member commented that due to a change in Channel 4’s commissioning process, multicultural content was not now seen across all programming. It was NOTED that the assessment tracking would assess on screen presence in relation to diversity. It was felt that Channel 4 would benefit from a multicultural and disability strategy which pulled together many interrelated strands, including the background staff, camera crew, presenters etc. Members were interested to NOTE that Channel 4 had been successful in developing new programme formats in relation to arts and music which had resulted in an expansion in this area. Following the discussion, Members thanked [Withheld from published minutes] for the presentation.

Channel 4 Briefing - Economic Background

15. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 81(05) which updated the Content Board in relation to Channel 4’s economic background, since the presentation to the Content Board in November 2004 and the completion of the PSB Review. Members were reminded that during the PSB review, Ofcom had carried out a detailed analysis of Channel 4’s finances under a number of different scenarios, and had concluded that no immediate case existed for awarding Channel 4 direct public funding and that the channel should continue as a commercially funded not-for-profit broadcaster. [Withheld from published minutes] [Withheld from published minutes].

16. The Content Board NOTED that over the next few months there were a number of important issues being considered which would affect Channel 4’s future:

17. [Withheld from published minutes]. The final report of the PSB Review proposed that Ofcom should assess the case for recognising and incentivising the contribution to PSB from commercial digital channels – potentially through conferring some of the benefits of PSB status onto the qualifying channels, therefore constituting a tier of channels with secondary PSB status. It was NOTED that there were very few PSB status privileges that Ofcom could extend to a channel with secondary PSB status. Members NOTED that Ofcom’s ability to act unilaterally was severely constrained due to the legal framework, in that the Secretary of State awarded PSB status and not Ofcom. The Content Board considered the pros and cons of two broad options, identified in the presentation, which could be considered by Ofcom to extend PSB status privileges. [Withheld from published minutes]. Members considered the two options and provided feedback to the executive raising points both for and against the options considered. It was AGREED that the Content Board were not in a position to make a clear recommendation on this issue to the executive or Ofcom Board.

Minutes of the Meetings held on 16&17 May 2005 (Content Board Minutes 27(05)) and Matters Arising

18. The minutes of the Content Board meeting held on 16/17 May 2005 were discussed and AGREED subject toa number of small amendments. Three documents were tabled for Members information, arising from action points from previous Content Board meetings:

The executive were REMINDED of the importance of completing agreed action points within agreed timescales.

It was NOTED that Graham Howell was developing Ofcom policy in relation to the recording of attributable voting within formal minutes and would circulate his decision to Members. It was NOTED that the April Content Board minutes would be agreed once this decision had been made.

It was NOTED that three appointments of independent Chairmen had been made in relation to the Northern Ireland , England and Wales Advisory Committees, and that the appointment in relation to Scotland would be made shortly. It was further NOTED that the newly appointed Chairmen would be attending an induction day in July 2005, during which they would discuss the relationship between the Advisory Committee and the Content Board, amongst other issues. It was NOTED that efforts were being made to ensure a diverse range of applicants for Non-Executive positions within Ofcom.

Content and Standards Group Report

19. Tim Suter updated Members in relation to current Content and Standards people and policy issues. Members NOTED that [Withheld from published minutes] had been appointed as the Director of Radio and Multi-media and that a new Head of Multi-media was being recruited. The Content Board NOTED that the team had concluded the PSB Review and had launched the Broadcasting Code. It was NOTED that further discussions had been undertaken with the BBC in relation to tier 1 issues, Ofcom’s relationship with the BBC and Ofcom’s co-regulatory relationship with the BBC Trust.

Rolling Forward Plan of Content Board Agendas

20. Graham Howell introduced the schedule CB 82(05) which set out the rolling forward plan of the Content Board agenda to December 2005, the contents of which were NOTED. Members NOTED that at the strategic away day in November it was intended that the Content Board would spend some time considering citizen-consumer issues and that the Chairman of the Consumer Panel would be invited to join the meeting in that respect.

Ofcom Board Meeting of 10 May 2005 and 24 May 2005

21. Kip Meek reported on the Ofcom Board meetings held on 10 May 2005 and 24 May 2005 . The main points to note were that :

  1. Ofcom’s review of strategic and behavioural issues which had been undertaken by two external consultants had been completed and the results of which were being reported back to colleagues by Stephen Carter;
  2. The Board had considered the results of the risk review and colleague survey and agreed a set of actions for Ofcom to address the arising issues, which included work-life balance issues;
  3. The Board had considered the planning options for digital switchover;
  4. The Board had considered the Regional Radio Conference;
  5. The Board had approved Ofcom’s response to the BBC Charter Review Green Paper;
  6. The Board had approved for publication the Telecommunications Strategic Review; and
  7. The Board had received a Consumer Policy update which had brought to the Board’s attention many difficult issues still being addressed by Ofcom in this area. It was Ofcom’s intention to move forward by embedding consumer thinking across Ofcom, and in this respect further thought and planning was required.

Members’ Interests

22. The following interests were declared for incorporation into the register of interests:

Food Promotion and children: Research project brief

23. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 83(05) which advised Members of the proposed research project brief for Ofcom’s continued work in relation to food promotion and children. Members were reminded that as a result of increasing concerns about levels of childhood obesity in the UK , Ofcom had been asked by the Secretary of State to consider targeted and proportionate proposals for strengthening the existing code on advertising food to children. In response, Ofcom published the results of an extensive research study looking at the issue of food promotion to children, in 2004. Members NOTED the key findings of this research and that the research had identified childhood obesity as a multi-faceted problem, requiring cross-departmental/agency work (e.g. FSA, Dept. of Health), which Ofcom stated it would support.

24. The Content Board NOTED that the executive was currently assessing the impact of a range of policy options in relation to their benefits and their impact on broadcasters. It was anticipated that following pre-consultation with stakeholders the public consultation would be undertaken in October 2005. It was NOTED that the consultation on changes to the code would take into account views expressed by parents in the research, the outcomes from the work of the Department of Health White Paper and the Food Standards Agency.

25. Members NOTED that the executive was also intending to conduct a second phase of research feeding into the work to investigate the regulatory options and the impact of these options. It was NOTED that it was of critical importance that the second stage of research stood up to substantial scrutiny and was seen to be objective and credible. Members were informed that the two key elements of the research study were an updated analysis of advertising activity including spend, exposure and creative techniques and primary research with parents to gather public feedback on policy options.

26. In relation to the proposed primary deliberative research, Members NOTED that the key objective would be to explore in detail with parents what they thought was the most appropriate and reasonable regulatory option and the reasons for their choice. It was NOTED that in order to fully understand public opinion on the range of regulatory options available and the potential implications of these option, the executive proposed a qualitative approach to the research, which would be undertaken in two stages:

The Content Board NOTED that a key principle of the deliberative research was to give a wide range of respondents the time to consider evidence from different angles and from a wide variety of sources in order to reflect on the issue from a more informed perspective. Members also NOTED the proposed elements of the Citizen Juries and the proposed range of audiences across the UK included in the deliberative research. In addition, it was NOTED that a peer review of the research methodology was to be conducted.

27. The Content Board considered the proposed project research brief, in particular the elements and audience of the stage 2 deliberative research. It was clarified that it was the intention of the executive to mix different groups of respondents during the stage 2 research, to help achieve a shared wisdom. It was SUGGESTED that another option which could be considered, to increase the amount of feedback from different respondents, would be to increase the number of workshops but reduce their length. Concern was raised in relation to the presentation of the evidence of implications of the changes on video, in relation to the limiting effect this would have on interaction and questioning. It was NOTED that the executive was considering a third stage in the research whereby some of the respondents from each group could be brought together with the evidence presenters to allow further questioning and interaction.

28. Following consideration of all the issues, the Content Board AGREED that it should support the recommendation to undertake deliberative research during the consultation stage. It was NOTED that the executive would return to the Content Board to provide an update on the qualitative work, prior to initiating the deliberative research and that the policy options would be brought back to the Content Board for consideration, once the impact assessments had been undertaken. It was SUGGESTED that the executive ensured a diversity of respondents and it was NOTED that in particular the Afro-Caribbean community were experiencing difficulties in this area. It was AGREED that Members would be sent details of the stage one focus groups and that if Members wished to attend they would contact [Withheld from published minutes].

Advertising Standards Authority Annual Report

29. [Withheld from published minutes] (Chairman of the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA)), [Withheld from published minutes] (Director General of the ASA) and [Withheld from published minutes] (Director General of the Committee of Advertising Practice (and of the Broadcast CAP ), also Director General of the Advertising Association) joined the meeting and provided an oral update to the Content Board in relation to the ASA’s Annual Report and the first five months co-regulation in 2005. Members NOTED that the ASA’s 2004 Annual Report had covered the first two months of the co-regulatory arrangement with Ofcom. Members NOTED that the ASA had been able to act swiftly in relation to some complaints where the welfare of children had been put at risk. The Content Board NOTED that the Auctionworld case had demonstrated how effectively the co-regulatory relationship was working.

30. The Content Board NOTED that the ASA had tried to be as transparent as possible to members of the public in relation to the number of complaints received, which in some cases had led to media publicity and a decision by the broadcaster to withdraw the advert. It was NOTED that the ASA had seen evidence of complaints motivated by an orchestrated campaign, however stated that the decision to conduct an investigation was not affected by the number of complaints received. Members NOTED that the ASA did investigate without complaints, in particular in relation to tele-shopping. It was NOTED that the ASA had received a number of multi-media complaints which were considered by a joint meeting of the broadcast and non-broadcast ASA Councils. The Content Board NOTED that the transferred staff had settled in well and that the ASA had undergone a period of significant learning in relation to broadcast advertising during the eight month period, in particular in relation to the different Code and arrangements with clearance houses. Members NOTED that the ASA were intending to look at the possible impact of new media technology on advertising and that the ASA were responsible for paid-for internet advertising.

31. The Content Board NOTED that the Chairman and members of the Advertising Advisory Committee ( AAC ) were in place and that the Committee was undergoing a period of bedding in and had now held three meetings. It was NOTED the working arrangements between the AAC and the Broadcasting Committee of Advertising Practice (BCAP), which were working well but would improve as the AAC established itself and its role. Members NOTED that the ASA spent time meeting with different consumer, opinion and educational groups to undertake research and consultation.

32. The Content Board thanked [Withheld from published minutes], [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] for attending the meeting and it was felt that the co-regulation arrangement had been a successful collaboration and that the work undertaken prior to the separation of powers had been constructive and had benefited both parties.

Five: Original Productions Quota

33. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 84(05) which asked the Content Board to consider a request from Five in relation to their original production quota and make a recommendation as to what quota for original production on Five would be “appropriate”, under the Act. The Content Board NOTED that, currently, the channel’s agreement with Ofcom stated that the amount of original production must rise by two per cent each year until 2009. It was NOTED that Five had approached Ofcom with a request to be released from the current requirement to increase the quota of original productions year on year (known as the 'ratchet'); and to be fixed with a new minimum level for original productions of 53 per cent by volume year-on-year (the 2005 level), which was a variation to Five’s current agreement. Members NOTED that Five had expressed a wish to set a fixed quota for original production going forward in 2003, but Ofcom had suggested the channel should await the conclusions of the public service television review before seeking such a change.

34. The Content Board NOTED that the recommendation of the executive was that it was “appropriate” for the level of original productions required from Five to be set at a fixed level going forward. However, the executive suggested that the “appropriate” level should be fixed at the 2006 figure of 55 per cent, rather than the current year’s figure of 53 per cent, as proposed by Five. [Withheld from published minutes]:

Members NOTED that the executive believed that 55 per cent was the optimal level, in light of Five’s economic circumstances, in comparison with other networks, and in viewers’ interests. In addition, Members NOTED that the definition of original programming had changed, which effectively reduced the number of programmes able to be classed as 'original' by Five.

35. In response to a query, it was NOTED that the initial notion of a ratchet, under which Five would increase original production year on year, was part of the channel’s licence application to the ITC in 1995. At the time, Five pledged increases that would, in the end, deliver a quota of 67 per cent. However, the channel stated that the broadcasting environment had changed markedly since the original application. Members felt that it was important that licensees were obliged to stick with any pledges made as part of a competitive bid licence application, but concluded that a time period of 10 years was sufficient for such a pledge to be modified, taking into account the changes in the broadcasting environment during the intervening years.

36. Following consideration of all the issues and information contained within the paper, the Content Board AGREED that it should recommend the executive’s proposals to the Ofcom Board . In making this recommendation, the Content Board was comforted by the fact that Ofcom would have discretion to re-instate the “ratchet” – and/or impose higher output quotas for original productions – if it believed at any time that Five was not continuing to fulfil its obligations to provide programmes of a sufficiently high quality. It was AGREED that this should be made clear to Five in any correspondence in relation to this decision.

Cross Promotion: Update

37. [Withheld from published minutes] updated the Content Board in relation to the work being undertaken by the executive on Cross Promotion. Members NOTED that subsequent to the research being completed, the executive had been considering how section 316 should be applied in relation to competition and that more work was required to develop Ofcom’s overall approach to competition and appeals. The Content Board NOTED that it would now consider the proposals for revised Cross Promotion Guidelines at the July 2005 Content Board meeting.

General Election: results and consequences

38. [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 87(05) which updated Members in relation to the results of the 2005 UK general election and the consequences for Ofcom. Members NOTED the make-up of the new House of Commons and Government. In particular Members were advised of changes within the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the issues on which the DCMS would be concentrating. In addition Members were advised of changes within the Department of Trade and Industry and the issues on which the DTI would be concentrating. Other areas NOTED were changes within the DTI and DCMS Select Committees, changes within the opposition parties, changes within the House of Lords and items of parliamentary engagement in June and July 2005.

Media Literacy: Charter

39. [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 88(05) which informed Members of the genesis and details of the UK Charter for Media Literacy drafted by the Media Literacy Task Force (MLTF) and proposals for its launch later in 2005. Members NOTED that the MLTF had been formed to take forward the agenda from “Inform and Empower: media literacy in the twenty-first century”, a conference attended by opinion-leaders from the media industries, education and government and was chaired by [Withheld from published minutes] Head of Education at Channel 4 and a member of the UK Film Council Board. It was NOTED that the MLTF met bi-monthly with the purpose of acting as an advocate for the importance of media literacy and that the Charter for media literacy was its first output. It was NOTED that some MLTF members were developing joint initiatives to enhance the work done by each of the organizations to promote media literacy .

40. The Content Board gave consideration and provided feedback to [Withheld from published minutes] in relation to the draft Charter, in particular the examples included and its drafting and a suggestion that it could benefit from a review by the Plain English Campaign. [Withheld from published minutes].

Content and Standards Report

41. [Withheld from published minutes] updated the Content Board on programmes which had been attracting complaints. The Content Board was also updated on the status of current Fairness and Content Sanctions cases.

Radio Licensing Committee ( 9 June 2005 )

42. Kip Meek updated Members on the Radio Licensing Committee ( RLC ) meeting held on 9 June 2005 ; when a decision had been made on the award of the Manchester , Norwich and Ballymena commercial radio licences and the Solent Area, East Midlands , Glasgow , Manchester and West Yorkshire Community radio licences. In addition the Committee considered a situation where there was a change in ownership between the award of a licence and the commencement of the licence.

Matters for External Communication

43. [Withheld from published minutes] outlined Ofcom’s recent activities and forthcoming announcements.

Ofcom Contact Centre

44. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 92(05) which advised the Content Board of the operation and work of the Ofcom Contact Centre (OCC). The Content Board NOTED that the OCC had established systems for dealing with both external and internal customers, and had teams with specific expertise in relation to Ofcom’s different regulatory areas. Members NOTED an overview of the work undertaken by the OCC during the 2004/5 financial year. Members were advised of the OCC Broadcast Support Team members, their current roles and responsibilities and their processes and interaction with Content and Standards.

45. Members were interested to NOTE the top ten cases (in terms of number of complaints) for both adverts and programmes in the 2004/5 financial year and the key performance indicators of the OCC in respect of these cases. In addition Members were advised of the top ten programmes in May 2005. Further details were provided in relation to the performance management of the OCC Broadcast team. Members NOTED a brief overview of the other OCC teams; Spectrum, Telecoms and Contact.

Any other business

a) Content Board Dinners

46. A request was made that wherever possible Members be seated next to external guests at future Content Board dinners.

Date of next meeting

47. It was NOTED that the next meeting would be held on Monday 18 and Tuesday 19 July 2005 at Riverside House.


Back to top Back to top


Further information

Help

Keep up-to-date